The above cases expanded upon the methods of proof outlined in R v Derwentside Justices ex parte Heaviside in particular allowing the prosecution to rely on similarity of name, date of birth and address. The Crown Prosecution Service Additionally, the user would need a driving licence and motor insurance. Prosecutors who are dealing with a prosecution for no insurance where the case is based on the driver not meeting some condition of the insurance must be vigilant to check that the exclusion relied upon to make out the offence is not one of those avoided by s.148(2). You must do this in writing. driving after making a false declaration as to physical fitness (section 92(10)); failing to notify Secretary of State of onset or deterioration of disability (section 94(3)); driving after refusal of licence under section 92 or 93 (section 94A); failure to surrender licence following revocation (section 99); obtaining driving licence, or driving, whilst disqualified (section 103(1)); using an uninsured motor vehicle (section 143); making a false statement to obtain a driving licence or certificate of insurance (section 174); section 244 RTA 1960 (re offences under section 235 RTA 1960 and section 99(5) Transport Act 1968); section 47(2) VERA 1994 (re offences under sections 29, 34, 35A, 37 or regulations made under the Act); section 73 Public Passenger Vehicles Act 1982 (re offences under sections 65 or 66 of the Act). The general time limit for injury litigation is three years, with multiple exceptions and special cases. All agencies should be alive to these cases in the interests of justice and respond as required, but no actions should be taken or departure from the standard procedure made where this might prejudice the future interest of any victim. If the Police do not comply with the rules and time limits, they cannot prosecute. You have 28 days to appeal your recorded police warning. Find out about speeding limits and penalties, what to do if you receive a speeding ticket and driver awareness courses. The failure to stop is usually viewed as the more serious of the two. To assist victims in any future claim for compensation, a written record should be kept of all relevant details about the driving documents produced to the police. In that event the case should not proceed unless the defence agrees to waive the point. In cases of the unauthorised taking of mechanically propelled vehicles, delay can often occur due to the gathering of forensic evidence where the offence is denied. The issue can be raised at any relevant stage of the proceedings or be decided as a preliminary point. Furthermore, considerable time will have elapsed since the alleged commission of the offences. A circumstance peculiar to the offender, as distinguished from the offence, is not a special reason: see Whittall v Kirby [1946] 2 All ER 552. Very exceptionally, a prosecutor may feel it appropriate to verify documents, but: Sections 173 and 174 RTA 1988 and sections 44 and 45 Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994 (VERA 1994) create a number of offences concerning forgery, fraudulent actions and false statements in connection with various road traffic documents. Section 170(3) places an obligation on the driver, if he does not give his name and address under subsection (2) above, to report the accident to a police constable or police station as soon as reasonably practicable and in any case within 24 hours. There is a time limit for service of an Notice of Intended Prosecution and failing to abide by it can be fatal to the Crown case. Mutual recognition of driving disqualifications between the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland came into force on 28 January 2010. As a consequence, any user of such a vehicle on a public road is likely at the very least to be committing the offences of using the vehicle without insurance and using the vehicle without an excise licence. For further commentary see (Wilkinson's 6.01). In West Yorkshire Probation Board v Boulter [2005] EWHC 2342 (Admin); R v Burns [2006] 2 Cr. The phrase "any person" includes, but is not limited to, limited companies or, depending upon evidential criteria, officers of such a company. The duty to stop means to stop sufficiently long enough to exchange the particulars above: (Lee v Knapp [1966] 3 All ER 961). A warning as to increased costs should also be given, where appropriate. . received for the purposes of considering whether there are grounds for mitigating the normal consequences of a conviction under s.35(1) Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 (RTOA 1988) (disqualification for repeated offences). Hi Jo, I have received a NIP over 14 days later the offence (speeding), I wrote the following letter of appeal, Could you please check if it is correct? Posting the notice within 14 days will . the possibility of danger to other road users (the most important factor). The Transport Act 1968 does not apply to any other part of the EC, including Northern Ireland. Many factors must be taken into consideration before the court even begins to consider exercising that discretion. You could be disqualified from driving if you build up 12 or more penalty points within a period of 3 . The notice of intended prosecution is automatically regarded to have been served within the time limit unless it is disputed. An analogy can be drawn from the case of DPP v Hay where it was held that once the prosecution has proved that the defendant drove the motor vehicle on a road, it is then for the defendant to show that he held a driving licence and that there was in force an appropriate policy of insurance, since these are matters that are peculiarly within his knowledge. Motorists, who have been unable to produce their driving documents on demand, following a lawful request by a police officer, should produce them for inspection within the required statutory period at a police station of their choice. The offence is equally serious, whether "use" or "causing or permitting" is involved. The minimum penalty for speeding is a 100 fine and 3 penalty points added to your licence. The Notice of intended prosecution or NIP can either be given verbally at the time of the incident or in writing (i.e. Careless driving. It is important to remember, however, that the alternative verdict can only be returned where the jury or magistrates have found the defendant 'not guilty' of the substantive charge. Offences are either way, punishable by way of fine in the Magistrates' Court or by imprisonment (maximum two years) in the Crown Court. Although the offence was not one of strict liability, "permitting" in section 96(11A) was to be given a wide meaning of failing to take reasonable steps to prevent contraventions, to be governed by the objective standards of a responsible employer. For reasons, see DPP v O'Connor [1992] RTR 66. Where a defendant raises exceptional hardship as a reason for not being disqualified under the repeated offence provisions of s.35 RTOA 1988 it is appropriate for the prosecutor to question the defendant. This is a summary offence. Under section 6(3) a certificate signed by or on behalf of the prosecutor, stating the date on which the necessary evidence came to his knowledge is conclusive evidence of that fact. . Summons Time Limit The notice of intended prosecution has to be sent to the registered keeper within 14 days, however if you were pulled over by the police for speeding they will have given your notice of intended prosecution at the roadside. Driving whilst under age does not constitute an offence of driving whilst disqualified (by reason of age) under s.103 RTA 1988 by virtue of section 103(4) RTA 1988. Using a mobile phone whilst driving. The law relating to tachographs falls into two categories: The rules governing the mechanical operation of tachographs are set out in EEC Regulation 3821/85 and that covering the hours permitted are set out in Regulation (EC) 561/2006. Whilst the Community Rules (EC Regulations) apply throughout the EC, the legislation which makes it an offence to breach those regulations differs from country to country. The offence under section 12 of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001. If you don't send the police the driver's details within the time they state then . If that has been served late it does not give the driver an excuse for not replying to the requirement to provide driver details. In essence the Notice of Intended Prosecution is a document that specifies the nature of the offence and the time and place it is alleged to have been committed. such proceedings must be properly recorded and the police informed; no action should be taken or departure from the standard procedure made where this might prejudice the future interest of any victim; Prosecutors must be alive to the sophistication of fraudulently produced material. A statutory defence is provided by section 143(3) RTA in relation to a driver who unwittingly drives his employer's uninsured vehicle. This power to prohibit the driving of UK passenger and goods vehicles rectifies the previous anomaly whereby only the driving of foreign registered vehicles could be prohibited by virtue of the provisions of the Road Traffic (Foreign Vehicles) Act 1972. A Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP) / Requirement for Driver details (172) must be completed and returned within 28 days of the date on the form. In Skills Motor Coaches Ltd, Farmer, Burley and Denman (Case C-297/99), the European Court of Justice held that time spent on activities having a bearing on driving, such as time spent reaching the pick-up point for a tachograph vehicle, would affect his state of tiredness and must be regarded as forming part of 'all other periods of work' within Article 15 of Regulation No. The Notice of Intended Prosecution, although issued in terms of Section 1 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, is often accompanied by a request to confirm the identity of the driver at the time it is alleged a road traffic offence has been committed. Section 127 MCA 1980 states that for all summary offences the information must be laid within six calendar months of the commission of the offence, except where any other Act expressly provides otherwise. DPP v Hay [2005] EWHC Admin 1395 - Where a defendant is charged with driving otherwise than in accordance with a licence and driving without insurance, and the Crown have proved that the defendant was driving a vehicle on the road, the non-issue by the police of form HO/RT/1 (requesting production of the documents) is not fatal to the prosecution case. Failure to do so will entitle the prosecution not only to seek an adjournment but also to cross-examine the defendant on his failure to give such notice so that the court may consider whether that failure reflected upon his bona fides, see DPP v O'Connor [1992] RTR 66, an authority which is also helpful on the procedural requirements and the general approach to be adopted. You'll need to return this within 28 days, to tell the police who was driving . When the evidence reveals a failure to comply with both subsections (2) and (3), proceedings should be brought for both offences. When such a point is raised, the prosecution should take into account the reason for the defendant's belief, the distance driven and the degree of risk, if any, to the public when determining whether it is in the public interest to proceed. Notice of Intended Prosecution. The following are the matters listed: (a) the age or physical or mental condition of persons driving the vehicle, Ordinarily, the notice should indicate that production should be made to the police station originally nominated by the driver when the request for production was first made. See also DPP v Vivier [1991] Crim LR 637, DPP v Neville [1996] 160 JP 758 and Cutter v Eagle Star Insurance Co. Ltd, Clarke v Kato and Others [1998] 4 All ER 417. The Concise Oxford Dictionary defines 'road' as a line of communication for use of foot passengers and vehicles; while in Oxford v Austin [1981] RTR 416 it was said to be a definable right of way between two points. The requires the keeper of the vehicle to identify the driver. A. A Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP) is a warning issued to inform a driver that they may be prosecuted for a motoring offence. The summons may also allege that you failed to produce one or more of these or other documents as required by law following a request by the police. If you have received a notice of intended prosecution you may be wondering what it is, read on. Call us on 0161 834 9494 to discuss your case. A. Magistrates & Crown Court Trials. Because of the restrictive provisions of s.40 Criminal Justice Act 1988 it will frequently be the case that when the Crown Court trial for a driving offence has been concluded, there will still be outstanding connected summary offences. A prominent notice should also accompany any summons alleging the document offences. If such a course is adopted, the reasons should be made clear to the Magistrates' Court. It does not mean the driver has 24 hours within which to report the collision. Summary offences should only be restored for hearing if it is considered necessary to meet the justice of the particular case. The fact that there may be a doubt as to how material was obtained does not automatically prevent admission of the evidence. Everyone knows that speeding is illegal but according to a recent study, a driver is caught speeding every 75 seconds in the UK, with the average driver going almost 10mph over the limit. Service of a notice at the last known address of the accused will suffice for good service. It is enough that it is received by a member of his staff impliedly authorised to receive it. Acts which breach these sections will often also amount to offences of a more serious nature which carry greater penalties. London, SW1H 9EA. Section 1 RTOA 1988 provides that a defendant cannot be convicted of certain road traffic offences set out in schedule 1 RTOA 1988 unless he or she has been warned that the question of prosecution would be taken into consideration. You must respond to a Notice of Intended Prosecution within 28 days of receiving it. However, since that offence is summary, if a defendant has been charged with other either way or indictable offences, then charging an offence under s.3 Forgery and Counterfeiting Act 1981(which is either way) is likely to be more appropriate. News. Such a warning is normally known as a "notice of intended prosecution", or NIP. Insurance cover is required for the use of a vehicle on a road or a public place. 1 (1) Where section 1, 6, 11 or 12 (1) of this Act is shown in column 3 of this Schedule against a provision of the M1 Road Traffic Act 1988 specified in column 1, the section in question applies to an offence under that provision. A person who fails to comply with subsection (2) or (3) above is guilty of an offence punishable with a maximum sentence of six months' imprisonment. information online. See also Restoration of Summary Offences after Trial on Indictment, below in this section. For example, such a situation may arise where the outstanding summary offence is a drink/drive allegation where the accused is liable to a three-year disqualification following a previous conviction. Where the police do not speak to you personally at the time, they can put this warning on paper and send it to you within 14 days. Following such a demand, no motorist who has not produced his or her driving documents at a police station should produce them to a court in answer to a charge or summons without having previously produced them at a police station for inspection. Section 6 applies to the following offences under RTA 1988: Section 37 of the Vehicles (Crime) Act 2001 amends the time limit in the Theft Act. The same considerations will thus apply. If a charge under s.2 RTA 1988 is sent to trial on indictment, the issue is for the trial court, unless the prosecutor decides that there has been a fatal non-compliance with the requirement. The offence of driving whilst disqualified, although a summary offence, can be included in the indictment if founded on the same facts or evidence, or if it forms part of a series of offences of the same or similar character as an indictable offence which has also been charged - s.40 (3)(c) Criminal Justice Act 1988. The time limit for a written warning is 14 days from the date of the offence. Where no production is made at the nominated police station, the police may issue proceedings that allege either or both allegations that the motorist drove/used a motor vehicle without the proper documentation or that he or she failed to produce them as required by law. Where did it happen? Bail should be considered for the period of any adjournment and the defendant encouraged to produce the relevant documents in the meantime. I have received a NIP for speeding, however at the date and time shown on the notice, I am 99% sure I was at home with the car. If you do in fact have any documents that would cover your use of the vehicle on the road at the time you were asked to produce them, you must, as soon as possible, take immediate steps to produce them at the police station you originally selected when the police officer asked you to choose one (this police station will be called the nominated police station from now on). Offences against traffic signs and police signals are dealt with in Sections 35, 36, 37 and 163 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. if you get a ticket from a speed camera) and must be received within 14 days of the offence (or dispatched so that it would reach the driver within the 14 days within the ordinary course of the post). This protocol recognises that motorists are required to produce driving documents to police officers following a lawful demand and that the documents may be produced at a nominated police station. Section 161A Highways Act 1980 (lighting fires so as to injure, interrupt or endanger users of a highway); Section 131(2) Highways Act 1980 (obliterating or pulling down a traffic sign). This is a summary offence; Section 115(1) Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 - the misuse of parking documents by, for example, lending a ticket issued by a parking meter to another person. It is regularly updated to reflect changes in law and practice. As a result, if an insurance policy contains a restriction (for example) that the driver must be aged over 21, that restriction may be void and a person aged under 21 who would otherwise have been covered to drive the vehicle may not be guilty of driving without insurance. This might, for example be a driving licence or certificate of insurance. The Code for Crown Prosecutors is a public document, issued by the Director of Public Prosecutions that sets out the general principles Crown Prosecutors should follow when they make decisions on cases. It is an offence, under s.99(5) TA 1968, for a person to knowingly falsify a tachograph entry made under s.97 TA1968 or entries kept for the purpose of regulations under s.98 TA1968 or under applicable Community rules. Where a summons or requisition has been issued in respect of an offence mentioned in Parts 1 and 2 of the Schedule, proceedings for that offence cease to be specified when the summons or requisition is served on the accused unless the defendant is also served with a statement of facts and written statement/s. There may, from time to time, be cases that call for exceptional treatment and departure from the normal procedures. Your appeal may mean that the police send a report to the procurator fiscal. Proceedings cease to be specified if a magistrates' court begins to receive evidence in those proceedings other than evidence that is: Proceedings for an offence mentioned in the Schedule are not specified if the defendant is charged under s.37(7)(d) Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE 1984) or the defendant is less than 16 years old at the time when a summons or requisition is issued in respect of the offence - S.3(1A and B) Prosecution of Offences Act 1985. In the . A taxi driver who had a licence to ply for hire in Rossendale and whose insurance covered him for the carriage of passengers for hire or reward under a public hire licence was not guilty of having no insurance in spite of plying for hire in Oldham, to which his licence did not extend. A. In cases where there are no charts available, consideration should be given to prosecuting defendants for this offence where devices have been fitted or wiring/electronics have been tampered with to prevent the tachograph from functioning correctly. A useful starting point to determine what rules apply to a particular vehicle on a particular journey is to establish, firstly, whether the Transport Act 1968 applies to the vehicle under s.95(2) TA 1968. Failing to respond within the statutory time limit of 28 days can result in further prosecution, six penalty points and a fine of up to 1000, . There must be evidence upon which a Court can properly infer that an employer gave a positive mandate or some other sufficient act to "cause" the offence to occur. . Our own firm offers a free online consultation service and this may just save you from 3pp and a possible ban. The Notice of intended prosecution or NIP can either be given verbally at the time of the incident or in writing (i.e. Where a driver has obtained a policy of insurance by deception, the policy will be valid so far as liability under s.143 RTA 1988 is concerned until the insurers have taken steps to "avoid" it. Know your possible technical defences to protect your licence. Where a vehicle is required to be fitted with a tachograph, it is a defence to a charge of using (or causing or permitting the use of) the vehicle when a seal on the recording equipment was not intact, to show (among other things) that the breaking or removal of the seal could not have been avoided (s.97(4)(a) TA 1968]. either orally or in writing at the time the offence was committed. Care should also be taken to ensure that sufficient charges are put to enable the gravity of the offence to be reflected in the sentencing process. We are regularly presented with the scenario when there is a degree of dubiety attached to . CPS and court staff are not trained in the detection of fraud. Under s.148 RTA 1988 Insurance companies cannot validly restrict an insurance policy by reference to any of the matters listed in s.148(2). Other ways to contact the Speed Enforcement Unit. So what exactly is a written NIP? A person who drives a vehicle on a road while disqualified by reason of age, commits an offence under s.87 RTA 1988, which prohibits a person driving a vehicle on a road otherwise than in accordance with a licence authorising him to do so. This was confirmed in the case of Oldham BC v Sajjad [2016] EWHC 3597 (Admin). This isn't straightforward and needs to be heavily evidenced. A special reason is one which is special to the facts of a particular offence. No notice is required if a full or provisional fixed penalty notice has been given or fixed (under the Provisions of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988) or if there is an accident involving the vehicle in question (of which the driver is aware). Production of driving documents at the police station in the first instance must be encouraged. The offence under section 12 of the Licensing Act 1872. Motorists are required to produce their documents to a police officer on demand or at a nominated police station within 7 days. In such circumstances the prosecution need to decide which is the more appropriate charge. Section 170(2) RTA 1988 provides that the driver of the motor vehicle must stop and, if required to do so by any person having reasonable grounds for so requiring, give his name and address, the name and address of the owner of the vehicle and the identification marks of the vehicle. There will be occasions where although the offence under section 22A is made out, the charging of one of the less serious offences listed above will be more appropriate. Such a certificate is deemed under sub-section (4) to have been so signed unless the contrary is proved. If you have been served a Notice of Intended Prosecution then you should contact our road traffic lawyers immediately. Subsection (3) makes it an offence for the keeper to fail to comply. Failure to specify the date will lead to proceedings being terminated: see David Burwell v DPP [2009] EWHC 1069 (Admin). Such alternative verdicts are permitted in relation to the summary offences of: Alternative verdicts under sections 4(1), 5(1)(a), 7(6), 4(2), 5(1)(b) or 29 RTA 1988 may be returned as appropriate, despite the fact that the six month time limit for those offences are likely to have lapsed. If you've been caught by a policeman operating a radar . Age prohibitions on driving are set out in s.101 RTA 1988. Self-balancing scooters do not currently meet the legal requirements and therefore are not legal for road use. This means that where an insurance policy purports to impose a restriction based on any of the matters listed above, that restriction is of no effect and the policy should be read as if the words containing the restriction had been struck out. if evidence of excess alcohol has been adduced at the Crown Court trial, it is more than likely that it will have been taken into account for the purpose of sentencing (this will obviously be so in the case of a trial for a section 3A offence); where a defendant has been convicted of an offence contrary to sections 1 or 3A RTA, a summary offence should not normally be restored if the defendant has been disqualified for a period at least as long as the obligatory period for the summary offence; the lapse of time between the date of the offence, the Crown Court trial and the likely date of hearing for the summary matters; if the defendant has been sentenced to a period of imprisonment, restoration of a summary offence will seldom be appropriate. It is essential to check files when powers have been exercised to ensure the material sought to be exhibited has been obtained lawfully in order to rebut any application under s.78 PACE. . Customer: On page 1 of the Notice of Intended Prosecution it states Notice Issue Date: 23/02/2023. A mechanical defect of which the driver was unaware, may amount to a defence (see R v Spurge [1961] 2 All ER 688), as will the loss of control over the vehicle due to circumstances beyond the control of the driver (see Burns v Bidder [1966] 3 All ER 29). A NIP, or Notice of Intended Prosecution, is used to notify you that you may be prosecuted for a road traffic offence that has been committed. . The court ruled that under Article 15 of EEC Regulation No: 3821/85 of 1985 a driver's obligation to record all other periods of work extends to: Sections 96 and 97(1) TA1968 create absolute offences for the driver. Notice of Intended Prosecution (NIP) If you were not stopped by the Police and cautioned at the time of the offence, because for example your offence is one where the evidence has been obtained by camera, before any further action can be taken, the Police or Process Department, must serve a Notice of Intended Prosecution, commonly known as a . A - A S172 Notice is a legal document, and failure to respond is an offence which can result in prosecution through the courts where the penalty is 6 points on your driving licence and a fine. The European Community Rules as set out in EEC Regulations 561/2006 and 3821/85; The domestic law contained in Part VI (sections 95 -103) of the Transport Act 1968 (TA 1968). The time limit for service . Failure to provide these details may amount to an offence for which a prosecution could be pursued. The Notice of Intended Prosecution must specify the nature of the alleged offence and the time and place where it is alleged to have been committed. In relation to s172, in general most police forces prosecute the company and not the Directors for failing to identify the driver as this leads to a conviction and fine without any effort. For this reason, it is best to seek legal advice before completing a Notice of Intended Prosecution. If the vehicle is a company car, the police will send the first notice to . In Vehicle Inspectorate v Blakes Chilled Distribution Ltd [2002] 166 JP Jo.118, the Administrative Court held that the intent necessary to prove vicarious liability was established where it could be proved that an employer had failed to take reasonable steps to prevent contraventions by drivers, provided that such failure was not due to honest mistake or accident. It is important to note, however, that only the registered keeper requires to receive such a warning within 14 days. Section 97(1) TA 1968 which is summary only, prohibits the use of a vehicle to which the TA 1968 applies in which "recording equipment" as stipulated in the Community Recording Equipment Regulations 3821/85 has either not been fitted or has not been appropriately repaired. Not only does the offence appear to cover a situation where the seals have been physically altered or tampered with, but also the use of a correctly manufactured and correctly placed seal where it can be proved that the mere use of the seal is accompanied by an intention to deceive. It requires the keeper to provide the police with the name of the person who was driving the vehicle at the time of the alleged motoring offence. The Codes of Practice under PACE apply to offences under this legislation as to any other. CPS staff, agents or court staff should not ordinarily inspect or verify driving documents, see paragraph 4 of the Protocol in Annex A. Attempting to or producing any document with intent to deceive may result in severe penalties. Where the police refer a case involving a Self-balancing Personal Transporter to the CPS, the prosecutor should, as is usual, consider the facts of the case, having regard to the licensing considerations set out above, and apply the two stages of the full code test in the Code for Crown Prosecutors when deciding whether or not a prosecution should proceed.